Dynamic Contact Angle Formulation for Numerical

Analysis of Microscale Two-Phase Flow

Prepared by,
Supervised By,
Kathan Khalasi Dr. Jyotirmay Banerjee
P17TM012 Professor
M. Tech. Turbomachines
1
Why microchannels?

Incredibly large surface-to-volume ratio

Precise and controlled flow

 Minimized material and sample consumption

Faster devices

Improved reproducibility and reliability

2
Applications

Electronics cooling

Cooling of turbine airfoils

Cooling of HCPV system

Micro heat exchangers

Microreactors

Ink-jet printing
Courtesy: [http://lasolarpower.blogspot.com] 3
Background

• Air cooling (100 W/m2)

• Water cooling (1000 W/m2)

4
Courtesy: https://envirotechsummit.org/era-miniaturization/
Different Methods of Cooling

5
Different flow regimes

Bubbly Flow Slug Flow Churn Flow

Slug-Annular Flow Annular Flow 6

Flow regime map given by Triplett et al.

7
Micro vs Macroscale flows

• Macroscale Flows • Microscale Flows

Gravity Gravity

Surface Tension Surface Tension

Contact area-volume ratio Contact area-volume ratio
Heat transfer coefficient Heat transfer coefficient
8
Surface Tension

9
Introduction to Contact Angle

𝜎𝑙𝑔

Gas
Liquid
𝜎𝑠𝑔 𝜃
𝜎𝑙𝑠
Solid Surface

Contact angle hysteresis 10

Literature Review:
Literature Review Taylor Flow

Author(s) Remarks

Qian and Lawal Numerically checked gas-liquid slug lengths by varying gas and liquid
inlet velocities, surface tension, viscosity, and contact angle
Guo and Chen Experimental and numerical analysis of effect of gas and liquid superficial
velocities on slug lengths for microfluidic chip
Santos and Kawaji Experimental and numerical analysis of slightly tapered microchannel
with T-junction, observed slug and stratified flows
Majumdar et al. Taylor bubble flow enhances heat transfer up to 1.2-1.6 times compared to
single phase flows
Kishimoto & Sasaki proposed a diamond-shaped micro-grooved cooling fin arrangement

Rubio-Jimenez et al. novel design of heat sinks employed with micro pin fin

Lee and Son Considered the effect of obstacle length, width, transverse position and
inclination on droplet splitting 11
Objectives

Development of Navier Stokes flow solver

 Two phase Navier Stokes flow solver including surface tension

 Static and dynamic contact angle formulation

 Analysis of Taylor bubble flow using two phase flow solver

 Analysis of Taylor bubble flow over an obstacle

12
Navier Stokes Flow Solver

• Governing Equations

ඵ 𝑉 ⋅ 𝑑𝐴 = 0 Surface Tension Force

𝐶𝑆

𝜕𝑉 1 1 1
ම 𝑑∀ + ඵ 𝑉𝑉 ∙ 𝑑𝐴 = ඵ 𝜇 ∇𝑉 ⋅ 𝑑𝐴 − ම ∇𝑝𝑑∀ + ම 𝑔𝑑∀ + ම 𝐹𝑠𝑡 𝑑∀
𝜕𝑡 𝜌 𝜌 𝜌
𝐶∀ 𝐶𝑆 𝐶𝑆 𝐶∀ 𝐶∀ 𝐶∀

Flow properties 𝜌𝑖𝑗 = 𝜌1 𝑐𝑖𝑗 + 𝜌2 1 − 𝑐𝑖𝑗

𝜇𝑖𝑗 = 𝜇1 𝑐𝑖𝑗 + 𝜇2 1 − c𝑖𝑗

13
PLIC-VOF method

Volume Fraction
0 0 0 0

1 𝐹𝑢𝑙𝑙 𝑐𝑒𝑙𝑙
𝑐𝑖𝑗 = ቐ 0 𝑖𝑓 𝐸𝑚𝑝𝑡𝑦 𝐶𝑒𝑙𝑙
0 0.3 0.6 0.7 0 < 𝑐𝑖𝑗 < 1 𝑀𝑖𝑥𝑒𝑑 𝐶𝑒𝑙𝑙

Major Steps Involved in the PLIC-VOF

0.2 0.6 1 1

 Reconstruction
 Advection
0.9 1 1 1

 Redistribution
14
Reconstruction: Interface Orientation

𝑐𝑖+1,𝑗+1 + 2 ∙ 𝑐𝑖+1,𝑗 + 𝑐𝑖+1,𝑗−1 𝑐𝑖−1,𝑗+1 + 2 ∙ 𝑐𝑖−1,𝑗 + 𝑐𝑖−1,𝑗−1

𝜕𝑐 −
𝑛𝑥 = = 4 4
𝜕𝑥 2 ∙ 𝑑𝑥

𝑐𝑖+1,𝑗+1 + 2 ∙ 𝑐𝑖,𝑗+1 + 𝑐𝑖−1,𝑗+1 𝑐𝑖+1,𝑗−1 + 2 ∙ 𝑐𝑖,𝑗−1 + 𝑐𝑖−1,𝑗−1

𝜕𝑐 −
𝑛𝑦 = = 4 4
𝜕𝑦 2 ∙ 𝑑𝑦

𝑛𝑥 𝑛𝑦
𝑛𝑥 = 𝑛𝑦 =
2 2 2
𝑛𝑥 + 𝑛𝑦 𝑛𝑥 2 + 𝑛𝑦

15
Reconstruction: Interface Location

Line Constant
𝑛 𝑥 ∙ 𝑥 + 𝑛𝑦 ∙ 𝑦 + 𝑑 = 0

Bisection method

16
Results of Reconstruction

17
Advection

𝜕𝑐
ම 𝑑∀ + ඵ 𝑐 𝑉 ⋅ 𝑑𝐴 = 0
𝜕𝑡
𝐶∀ 𝐶𝑆

𝑛+1 𝑛
𝑐𝑖,𝑗 = 𝑐𝑖,𝑗 + ෍ 𝑐𝑓𝑙𝑢𝑥

18
Advection Flux Calculation

Fluid leaving in
one time step

19
Redistribution

Overshoot Undershoot

𝑐𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 𝑚𝑖𝑛 𝑐 − 1 + 𝑐𝑡 , 1 𝑐𝑚𝑖𝑛 = 𝑚𝑎𝑥 𝑐 + 𝑐𝑡 , 0

𝑐 = 𝑐 − (𝑐𝑚𝑎𝑥 − 𝑐𝑡 ) 𝑐 = 𝑐 + (𝑐𝑡 − 𝑐𝑚𝑖𝑛 )
 Where, 𝑐𝑡 is maximum from  Where, 𝑐𝑡 is minimum from
surrounding cells surrounding cells

20
Validation of PLIC-VOF algorithm

S-shape
Multi Vortexflow
Test 21
Validation of Two-Phase flow solver: RT Instability

22
Dam Break

23
Dam Break with Gate opening

t=10 mm

Gate
 Gate Motion
𝐿=600 mm
1 2
𝐻𝐷 =600 mm 𝑦 𝑡 = 𝑎𝑡 , 𝑡 ≤ 𝑡0
2
1
𝐻=300 mm 𝑦 𝑡 = 𝑎𝑡0 2 + 𝑣0 𝑡 − 𝑡0 , 𝑡 > 𝑡0
Water Body 2

𝐿𝐷 =1610 mm
24
Results of Dam Break with Gate opening

•Wave front tracking

Martin,1952, H=0.057 m
3.5 Martin,1952, H=0.114 m
Dressler,1954, H=0.055 m
Dresselr,1954, H=0.11 m
3 Dressler,1954, H=0.22 m
Lobovsky,2014, H=0.3 m
Lobovsky,2014, H=0.6 m
2.5 Present Study
x/H
2

1.5

1
H
0.5
X
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 25
t(g/H)^0.5
Surface Tension: Convolution of volume Fraction

• Surface tension force

𝐹𝑠 = 𝜎𝜅𝑛ො + ∇𝑠 𝜎  Where,
𝑛
𝜅 = −∇ ∙ 𝑛ො = −∇ ∙
𝑛
𝐹𝑣 = 𝜎𝜅 𝑛𝛿
ො 𝑠
∇C ∇C
𝑛ො = 𝛿𝑠 = = ∇C
∇C 𝐶

𝐹𝑆𝑇 = 𝜎𝜅∇C

26
Surface Tension: Convolution of volume Fraction

• Mollified volume fraction

1 1 2 1
Gaussian Kernal → 2 4 2
16
1 2 1

2 2 3
𝐾6 = ൜ 𝐴 𝑟 − 𝑒 𝑖𝑓 𝑒 < 𝑟
0 𝑒𝑙𝑠𝑒

𝑒 2 4
𝐾8 = ቐ 𝐴 1 − 𝑖𝑓 𝑒 < 𝑟
𝑟
0 𝑒𝑙𝑠𝑒

27
Mollified volume fraction field

r =1· dx r =2 · dx r =3 · dx r =4 · dx
Surface Tension : Height Function Methodology

Curvature can be directly obtained from the

volume fraction
 Determine the direction along which height function
should be oriented.
 Calculate the height functions by adding up the
volume fractions
 Obtain the value of Curvature

𝑎=𝑗+3

𝐻𝑖 = ෍ 𝑐𝑖𝑎 𝑑𝑦
𝑎=𝑗−3

29
Calculation of Curvature using HF method

• Height Function
𝐻𝑥𝑥
𝜅=− 3
2 2
1 + 𝐻𝑥

𝐻𝑖+1 − 2𝐻𝑖 + 𝐻𝑖−1

𝐻𝑥𝑥 =
𝑑𝑥 2

𝐻𝑖+1 − 𝐻𝑖−1
𝐻𝑥 =
2𝑑𝑥

30
Static Drop

Laplace Theorem :
𝜎 23.61
∆𝑃 = = = 11.805
𝑅 2

CSF HF 31
Bubble Rise Problem (𝜎 = 0.0728 𝑁/𝑚)

0.2 sec 0.35 sec 0.5 sec

32
Bubble Rise Problem (𝜎 = 728.0 𝑁/𝑚)

0.2 sec 0.35 sec 0.5 sec 33

Contact Angle Implementation

 Normal at interface

𝑛ො = 𝑛ො 𝑤 cos 𝜃 + 𝑛ො 𝑡 sin 𝜃

 Wall adhesion Boundary for horizontal wall

• Replacing 𝑛𝑥 and 𝑛𝑦 by − cos 𝜃 and ± sin 𝜃

34
Slip boundary condition

𝜕𝑈
𝑅𝑒𝑎𝑙 𝑈𝑟𝑒𝑎𝑙 𝑈𝑤 = 𝜆𝑁
𝜕𝑛𝑤

𝑈𝑟𝑒𝑎𝑙
𝑈𝑤 =
∆𝑦
𝑊𝑎𝑙𝑙 1+
𝜆𝑁
2𝜆𝑁
𝑑𝑦
If 𝜆𝑁 =
2
𝐼𝑚𝑎𝑔𝑖𝑛𝑎𝑟𝑦 𝑈𝑖𝑚𝑔 = 0 𝑈𝑖𝑚𝑔 = 2𝑈𝑤 − 𝑈𝑟𝑒𝑎𝑙

35
Dynamic contact angle model

Cox : 𝜃𝑑3 = 𝜃𝑠3 + 144 ∙ 𝐶𝑎

𝜇𝑙𝑖𝑞 𝑈𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑡𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑒
Ca is capillary number which can be given by
𝜎

36
Analytical Shape of Droplet

𝐼𝑛𝑖𝑡𝑖𝑎𝑙 𝑆ℎ𝑎𝑝𝑒 𝑜 𝜃𝑠 > 90𝑜

𝜃𝑠 < 90

𝑅𝑜 𝑒 𝜋
𝑒 𝑅 𝑅 = 𝑅𝑜
2 𝜃𝑠 − sin 𝜃𝑠 ∙ cos 𝜃𝑠

𝑒 = 𝑅 1 − cos 𝜃𝑠

37
Initial Patch: Static contact Angle

38
Results for 𝜃 = 120°

(a) (b)

(c) (d)

(e) (f)
Equilibrium Condition

(g) (h)

39
Oscillating Droplet for theta= 120°

40
Results – Acute and Obtuse contact
Contact Angle Implementation angle

𝜃 = 135°
𝜃 = 15°

𝜃 = 30° 𝜃 = 170° 41
Dynamic Contact Angle

𝑅𝑜

0.95𝑅𝑜

Initial condition Dynamic Contact Angle

42
Dynamic Contact Angle

Droplet Spreading
43
Comparison of SCA and DCA
Contact Angle Implementationwith experiments

𝐴 − 𝐴𝑜
𝐴∗ =
𝐴𝑓 − 𝐴𝑜

𝑡𝜎
τ= 1
𝜇𝑉 3

44
Taylor Bubble Flow Formation Mechanism

(a) Intrusion:
(b) Blocking:
Four Phases:
(c) Squeezing
(d) Breakup

45
Validation of gas slug length with experiments

Properties

Density of water 998.2 kg/m3

Density of air 1.225 kg/m3
Dynamic viscosity of water 1.03×10-3 Pa∙s
Dynamic viscosity of air 1.79×10-5 Pa∙s
Surface tension coefficient 0.031 N/m
Air inlet velocity 0.0347 m/s

46
Validation of gas slug length

1.0 0.5 0.0347 0.0174 1.10-1.17 1.07

1.0 1.0 0.0347 0.0347 0.66-0.72 0.662
1.0 2.0 0.0347 0.0694 0.47-0.49 0.487
1.0 3.0 0.0347 0.1042 0.38-0.40 0.392
1.0 5.0 0.0347 0.1736 0.35-0.39 0.368
1.0 10.0 0.0347 0.3472 0.20-0.23 0.212
47
Taylor Bubble formation with SCA and DCA

SCA

DCA

48
Gas Cavity Shape for Different Contact Angles
C
0.5

C
0.5

C
0.5
30o

C
60o 0.5

C
90o 0.5

105o

120o

49
Taylor Bubble Flow past a Micro-obstacle

• Computational Domain

Gas inlet

Obstacle

0.2 mm

0.025 mm
0.5 mm Upper Arm

2.0 mm 0.025 mm
0.2 mm

Main Channel Outlet

Y

Water inlet 1.0 mm

4.5 mm

50
Water Flow past a Micro-obstacle

• Streamlines and Vorticity contours for flow over an obstacle

Properties

Density of water 998.2 kg/m3

Density of air 1.225 kg/m3
Dynamic viscosity of water 1.03×10-3 Pa∙s
Dynamic viscosity of air 1.79×10-5 Pa∙s
Surface tension coefficient 0.0735 N/m
Water inlet velocity 0.251 m/s
Air inlet velocity 0.073 m/s

51
Variation of transverse position of an obstacle

Y=0.1 mm

Y=0.08 mm

Y=0.06 mm

52
Variation of transverse position of an obstacle

Y=0.04 mm

Y=0.02 mm

53
Image: Nirav Patel, Hemantkumar B. Mehta
Summary

• Implementation of PLIC-VOF for interface capturing and coupling with incompressible

Navier-Stokes solver. Surface tension force is modelled using CV and HF method. The
HF methodology gives better results compared to CV method.
• Contact angle is implemented using the wall adhesion boundary condition. The shapes
of droplet obtained numerically are compared with the analytical shapes obtained by
volume conservation.
• DCA is implemented by Cox model along with the slip boundary. The results obtained
by SCA and DCA are validated against the experimental data. The results conclude
that the DCA model is must for simulating real life contact angle problems.

55
Summary

• The Taylor bubble is generated using the T- junction microchannel. The Taylor bubble
is validated for the gas slug lengths against the experimental data of Guo-Chen. The
effect of different contact angles on the shape of the gas slug is also studied.
• The Taylor bubble over a square micro-obstacle has been analyzed. The bubble splits
into half when the obstacle is placed at the centerline of the main channel. The bubble
prefers to pass through the passage with larger cross-section, when the obstacle is
placed away from centerline.

56
Scope for Future Work

• Different sizes and shapes of obstacles can be used to find the best for the heat transfer
enhancement. The inclination of the obstacle can be varied to get even volume droplet
distribution in microchannels.
• For flows having an interface, mesh refinement gives better results as compared to
uniform grid. Very fine mesh is required near the wall to capture the liquid film
around the Taylor bubble inside a microchannel. These liquid films are quite important
phenomenon, as the bubble velocity depends on it. This can be achieved by either non-
uniform meshing or mesh refinement.

57
References

[1] R. G. Cox, “The dynamics of the spreading of liquids on a solid surface. Part 1. Viscous flow,” J. Fluid Mech., vol. 168, pp. 169–194, 1986.
[2] K. Jähnisch, V. Hessel, H. Löwe, and M. Baerns, “Chemistry in Microstructured Reactors,” Angew. Chem. Int. Ed., vol. 43, no. 4, pp. 406–
446, Jan. 2004.
[3] T. Lewandowski, T. Ochrymiuk, and J. Czerwinska, “Modeling of Heat Transfer in Microchannel Gas Flow,” J. Heat Transf., vol. 133, no.
2, p. 022401, 2011.
[4] J R Blake and D. C. Gibson, “Cavitation Bubbles Near Boundaries,” Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech., vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 99–123, 1987.
[5] L. Micheli, N. Sarmah, K. S. Reddy, X. Luo, and T. K. Mallick, “Design, Development, and Analysis of a Densely Packed 500x
Concentrating Photovoltaic Cell Assembly on Insulated Metal Substrate,” Int. J. Photoenergy, vol. 2015, pp. 1–18, 2015.
[6] K. A. Triplett, S. M. Ghiaasiaan, S. I. Abdel-Khalik, and D. L. Sadowski, “Gas±liquid two-phase ¯ow in microchannels Part I: two-phase
¯ow patterns,” Int. J. Multiph. Flow, p. 18, 1999.
[7] D. Youngs, “Time-Dependent Multi-material Flow with Large Fluid Distortion,” in Numerical Methods in Fluid Dynamics, vol. 24,
Academic Press, 1982, pp. 273–285.
[8] D. Dandy and L. Leal, “Buoyancy-driven motion of a deformable drop through a quiescent liquid at intermediate Reynolds numbers,”
Journal of Fluid Mechanics, vol. 208, pp. 161–192, Nov. 1989.
[9] F. H. Harlow and J. E. Welch, “Numerical Calculation of Time‐Dependent Viscous Incompressible Flow of Fluid with Free Surface,” Phys.
Fluids, vol. 8, no. 12, pp. 2182–2189, Dec. 1965.
58
References

[10] S. Osher and J. A. Sethian, “Fronts propagating with curvature-dependent speed: Algorithms based on Hamilton-Jacobi formulations,” J.
Comput. Phys., vol. 79, no. 1, pp. 12–49, Nov. 1988.
[11] M. Sussman, P. Smereka, and S. Osher, “A Level Set Approach for Computing Solutions to Incompressible Two-Phase Flow,” J. Comput.
Phys., vol. 114, no. 1, pp. 146–159, Sep. 1994.
[12] W. F. Noh and P. Woodward, “SLIC (Simple Line Interface Calculation),” in Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on
Numerical Methods in Fluid Dynamics June 28 – July 2, 1976 Twente University, Enschede, Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 1976, pp. 330–340.
[13] W. J. Rider and D. B. Kothe, “Reconstructing Volume Tracking,” J. Comput. Phys., vol. 141, no. 2, pp. 112–152, Apr. 1998.
[14] M. Rudman, “Volume-Tracking Methods for Interfacial Flow Calculations,” Int. J. Numer. Methods Fluids, vol. 24, no. 7, pp. 671–691,
Apr. 1997.
[15] C. W. Hirt and B. D. Nichols, “Volume of fluid (VOF) method for the dynamics of free boundaries,” J. Comput. Phys., vol. 39, no. 1, pp.
201–225, 1981.
[16] A. Prosperetti and G. Tryggvason, Eds., Computational Methods for Multiphase Flow, 1 edition. Cambridge; New York: Cambridge
University Press, 2009.
[17] J. U. Brackbill, D. B. Kothe, and C. Zemach, “A continuum method for modeling surface tension,” J. Comput. Phys., vol. 100, no. 2, pp.
335–354, 1992.
[18] J. Helmsen, P. Colella, and Puckett, “Non-convex profile evolution in two dimensions using volume of fluids,” Lawrence Berkeley
National Laboratory, 1997. 59
References

[19] M. Sussman, “A second order coupled level set and volume-of-fluid method for computing growth and collapse of vapor bubbles,” J.
Comput. Phys., vol. 187, no. 1, pp. 110–136, May 2003.
[20] S. J. Cummins, M. M. Francois, and D. B. Kothe, “Estimating curvature from volume fractions,” Comput. Struct., vol. 83, no. 6–7, pp.
425–434, Feb. 2005.
[21] M. M. Francois, S. J. Cummins, E. D. Dendy, D. B. Kothe, J. M. Sicilian, and M. W. Williams, “A balanced-force algorithm for
continuous and sharp interfacial surface tension models within a volume tracking framework,” J. Comput. Phys., vol. 213, no. 1, pp. 141–
173, Mar. 2006.
[22] S. Popinet, “An accurate adaptive solver for surface-tension-driven interfacial flows,” J. Comput. Phys., vol. 228, no. 16, pp. 5838–5866,
Sep. 2009.
[23] D. Qian and A. Lawal, “Numerical study on gas and liquid slugs for Taylor flow in a T-junction microchannel,” Chem. Eng. Sci., vol.
61, no. 23, pp. 7609–7625, Dec. 2006.
[24] F. Guo and B. Chen, “Numerical Study on Taylor Bubble Formation in a Micro-channel T-Junction Using VOF Method,” Microgravity
Sci. Technol., vol. 21, no. S1, pp. 51–58, Aug. 2009.
[25] R. M. Santos and M. Kawaji, “Numerical modeling and experimental investigation of gas–liquid slug formation in a microchannel T-
junction,” Int. J. Multiph. Flow, vol. 36, no. 4, pp. 314–323, Apr. 2010.
[26] A. Majumder, B. Mehta, and S. Khandekar, “Local Nusselt number enhancement during gas–liquid Taylor bubble flow in a square
mini-channel: An experimental study,” Int. J. Therm. Sci., vol. 66, pp. 8–18, Apr. 2013. 60
References

[27] W. Lee and G. Son, “Numerical study of obstacle configuration for droplet splitting in a microchannel,” Comput. Fluids, vol. 84, pp. 351–
358, Sep. 2013.
[28] T. Kishimoto and S. Saski, “Cooling characteristics of diamond-shaped interrupted cooling fin for high-power LSI devices,” Electron.
Lett., vol. 23, no. 9, p. 456, 1987.
[29] C. A. Rubio-Jimenez, S. G. Kandlikar, and A. Hernandez-Guerrero, “Numerical Analysis of Novel Micro Pin Fin Heat Sink With Variable
Fin Density,” IEEE Trans. Compon. Packag. Manuf. Technol., vol. 2, no. 5, pp. 825–833, May 2012.
[30] D. J. E. Harvie and D. F. Fletcher, “A New Volume of Fluid Advection Algorithm: The Stream Scheme,” J. Comput. Phys., vol. 162, no. 1,
pp. 1–32, Jul. 2000.
[31] H. T. Ahn and M. Shashkov, “Adaptive moment-of-fluid method,” J. Comput. Phys., vol. 228, no. 8, pp. 2792–2821, May 2009.
[32] J. C. Martin, W. J. Moyce, W. G. Penney, F. R. S, A. T. Price, and C. K. Thornhill, “An experimental study of the collapse of liquid
columns on a rigid horizontal plane,” Phil Trans R Soc Lond A, vol. 244, no. 882, pp. 312–324, Mar. 1952.
[33] R. F. Dressler, “Hydraulic resistance effect upon the dam-break functions,” J. Res. Natl. Bur. Stand., vol. 49, no. 3, p. 217, Sep. 1952.
[34] L. Lobovský, E. Botia-Vera, F. Castellana, J. Mas-Soler, and A. Souto-Iglesias, “Experimental investigation of dynamic pressure loads
during dam break,” J. Fluids Struct., vol. 48, pp. 407–434, Jul. 2014.
[35] G. Lauber and W. H. Hager, “Experiments to dambreak wave: Horizontal channel,” J. Hydraul. Res., vol. 36, no. 3, pp. 291–307, May
1998.
[36] C. Hu and M. Sueyoshi, “Numerical simulation and experiment on dam break problem,” J. Mar. Sci. Appl., vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 109–114, Jun.
2010.
[37] Z. Ye, X. Zhao, and Z. Deng, “Numerical investigation of the gate motion effect on a dam break flow,” J. Mar. Sci. Technol., vol. 21, no. 4,
pp. 579–591, Dec. 2016.
[38] M. W. Williams, D. B. Kothe, and E. G. Puckett, “Accuracy and Convergence of Continuum Surface Tension Models,” p. 16, 1998.
61
References

[39] D. B. Kothe, R. C. Mjolsness, and M. D. Torrey, RIPPLE: A computer program for incompressible flows with free surfaces. Available to
DOE and DOE contractors from OSTI, 1991.
[40] R. L. Hoffman, “A study of the advancing interface. I. Interface shape in liquid—gas systems,” J. Colloid Interface Sci., vol. 50, no. 2, pp.
228–241, 1975.
[41] S. F. Kistler, “Hydrodynamics of wetting,” Wettability, vol. 6, pp. 311–430, 1993.
[42] S. Afkhami and M. Bussmann, “Height functions for applying contact angles to 2D VOF simulations,” Int. J. Numer. Methods Fluids, vol.
57, no. 4, pp. 453–472, Jun. 2008.
[43] J.-B. Dupont and D. Legendre, “Numerical simulation of static and sliding drop with contact angle hysteresis,” J. Comput. Phys., vol.
229, no. 7, pp. 2453–2478, Apr. 2010.
[44] S. Thippavathini and M. K. Moharana, “Flow of Taylor Bubble in Microchannel Having an Obstacle,” in ASME 2014 12th International
Conference on Nanochannels, Microchannels and Minichannels, Chicago, Illinois, USA, 2014, p. V001T03A012.

62
THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION

63
SCA

DCA